Comments on: Your Morning Clickyfesthttp://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/
It rankles me when somebody tries to tell somebody what to do.Thu, 29 Jan 2015 14:59:44 +0000hourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.7By: thornhttp://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/comment-page-1/#comment-93084
Thu, 01 May 2008 06:59:13 +0000http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/#comment-93084What is it about Texas and sending tanks and stormtroopers into churches?

What is it about Texas and building cult compounds so that older men can impregnate multiple girls barely past the 7th grade?

thorn

]]>By: Andrewhttp://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/comment-page-1/#comment-91729
Wed, 30 Apr 2008 04:37:31 +0000http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/#comment-91729Could someone please explain why we should not consider our current federal, state and local law enforcement agencies as the “quartering large bodies of armed troops among us”? Don’t they actually constitute a standing army?

I also don’t think there is any question that the government ” has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.”.

The whole government operation directed at the church in Texas stinks to high heaven. It’s utterly reprehensible. The press isn’t even asking the most basic questions about it and 99% of the public are just fine with it.

What is it about Texas and sending tanks and stormtroopers into churches?

]]>By: Phelpshttp://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/comment-page-1/#comment-91618
Tue, 29 Apr 2008 22:06:11 +0000http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/#comment-91618Personally, I hope for a day where the posse comitatus argument is that since the police have these weapons and devices, they must be proper militia arms.
]]>By: Scoobyhttp://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/comment-page-1/#comment-91556
Tue, 29 Apr 2008 17:57:22 +0000http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/#comment-91556Aaron,

It was changed in the last couple of years specifically spurred on by the polygamists moving to Texas from their compound in Colorado City, AZ.

I’m curious- are there many investigations/ prosecutions involved with other teen pregnancies? Does CPS seize the kids and perform mass DNA tests for routine teen pregnancies where the mother is less than 17 years 9 months old at the time of delivery?

]]>By: Aaronhttp://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/comment-page-1/#comment-91549
Tue, 29 Apr 2008 17:40:52 +0000http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/#comment-91549Actually, the age limit for marriage in Texas is 16 with parental consent, 18 without. Marriages under 16 are only allowed with a court order. This was changed in the past couple of years, and you might find a lot of references to the old laws.

It’s certainly seems to be the case that government meddling has driven up the price of food. But futures markets and such can also do that, and I think we are seeing a bit of both. I am on the fence about whether things as vital to our life as food and energy should be traded the way they are, it seems like it can amplify the mistakes of our illustrious leaders.

I propose all government elected officials, during their terms in office, should have to provide all of their life’s necessities (Food, clothing, schooling, energy) on a budget that is equivalent to that of an average middle class family of the same size. Right now, none of this affects them, and they get more political bang for the buck appeasing the greenies and blaming something/someone else.

Regardless, governments rarely succeed in solving problems like this. Growing food to use in energy production, when people are starving and food prices are rising, is like filling your swimming pool from your hose while your house is burning. Well, at least you will be able to go for a swim…..

]]>By: MacKhttp://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/comment-page-1/#comment-91533
Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:25:02 +0000http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/#comment-91533I would love to see the search warrant for the FLDS compound.
I assume that it included a 50 year old male since that was the falsely reported married to a 16 male they would have been looking for.
Seeing the blown open safe though I just can’t wrap my brain around if they thought maybe he was hiding in there.
]]>By: Scoobyhttp://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/comment-page-1/#comment-91525
Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:09:11 +0000http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/#comment-91525scott,

Texas recognizes common law marriages. Of course, if the 14-16 year old is not the first wife, a common law marriage may not be valid (the requirements for eligibility for common law marriage are the same as formal marriage, including prohibition on bigamy).

I’m just saying: No marriage license != not married, at least in Texas and 10-15 other states.

]]>By: Nick Thttp://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/comment-page-1/#comment-91514
Tue, 29 Apr 2008 15:52:05 +0000http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/#comment-91514Re: the Sex Offender’s suit. It seems like the facts are very much in dispute there, but if this guy is not being harrassed as he claims there certainly are others out there that are experiencing it.

There is a huge problem in this country with our willingness to label some people sex-offenders. I think Radley has linked to great articles that articulate this point very well, but in general there is a huge difference between people who have sex with a 15 year old girl who is in every physical way a woman, and people who prety on 6 year old small children. One indicates a perfectly normal desire that was not properly controlled, and the latter indicates a sickness where the likelihood of re-offending is incredibly high.

But naturally most people here “sex offender” and they think “kiddy-diddler.” Indeed most laws that sex offedners are uniquely subject to are based on the idea of a high likelihood of re-offending which is only truly present in people who assault small children.

Of course I’m not condoning sex with 15 year olds under any circumstances, but we should not lump all those perpetrators in together and just break them up by levels when no one knows the difference.

]]>By: scotthttp://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/comment-page-1/#comment-91513
Tue, 29 Apr 2008 15:51:32 +0000http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/#comment-91513I’ll take that bet. I doubt that anyone of those girls has a marraige license, and that all of the fathers are MUCH older.
]]>By: Jozefhttp://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/comment-page-1/#comment-91510
Tue, 29 Apr 2008 15:41:34 +0000http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/#comment-91510The minimum marriage age in Texas is 14 for both girls and boys (with parental consent), and so is the age of consent for married couples (actually, this is an exception to the law that legalizes heterosexual sex with kids from 14, as long as the older party is no more than 3 years older). As such, as long as the pregnant girls were married and they had sex only with their husbands or boys no more than 3 years older, no law was broken. One may consider the early pregnancies immoral, but unless proved guilty according to current laws, they were not illegal. And I’m willing to wager that the church was very careful not to break any laws.
]]>By: scotthttp://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/comment-page-1/#comment-91498
Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:48:15 +0000http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/#comment-91498Healine today –

“53 girls from 14-17 either pregnant or have children already”.

I wonder how many more that are over 18 now have given birth before turning 18.

I’m as much of a libertarian as anybody, but I expect our society to protect underage girls from a sex-cult pretending to be a religion.

I don’t know if this was the best way to handle this problem, but it looks to me like there are 53 cases of statutory rape to be prosecuted here.

Here in AZ we let the problem continue for decades. It looks like TX didn’t want that to happen.

What exactly was he needed for? Were they also investigating the compound for illegal fishing or out-of-season hunting?

And why in the name if Christ is that game warden (or ANY game warden) carrying an AR-15?

]]>By: Mike Leatherwoodhttp://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/comment-page-1/#comment-91489
Tue, 29 Apr 2008 13:41:50 +0000http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/29/your-morning-clickyfest/#comment-91489Looking at the comments on the grade school black market, it seems people are content with the new diet plans. They see no issue, other than kids just don’t know what is best for them. I do agree kids usually don’t.
But, I do challenge the cliche’ of kids being unhealthy, especially due to their diets. One good meal a day does not a healthy person make. Like global climate, the sample is just too small and the system just too complex to say one or two things will make a difference. It usually doesn’t.
]]>